Obama Calls Local Officials to Lobby for Gun Control After Kalamazoo

“President Obama called [the mayor, sheriff and police chief] in Kalamazoo, Michigan, Monday morning to pledge federal resources for their probe of a mass shooting, and said the tragedy highlights the need for more gun laws,” washingtontimes.com reports. And then the President of the United states . . .

used the mass shooting to berate pols (and anyone else who would listen) at a governors’ conference “Clearly we’re going to need to do more if we’re going to keep innocent Americans safe. I’ve got to assume that all of you are just as tired as I am of seeing this stuff happen in your states.”

And then President Obama called on the governors to “partner and think about what we can do in a common-sense way, in a bipartisan way, without some of the ideological rhetoric that so often surrounds that issue.”

Remind me again which side uses “rhetoric” to degrade and destroy Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms? And while we’re at it . . .

Local authorities haven’t revealed yet how the alleged gunman, James B. Dalton, obtained the handgun used in the shootings. Six people were killed at random and two others seriously wounded.

Mr. Obama . . . told the governors that gun violence is just as much of a national-security concern as terrorist attacks like the one in California in December.

“The attack in San Bernardino killed 14 of our fellow Americans, and here’s a hard truth: we probably lost even more Americans than that to guns this weekend alone,” Mr. Obama said.

Once again, the President is waving the bloody shirt for gun control before any salient facts about a shooting emerge. Not that salient facts have anything to do with his call for gun control. Or anyone else’s either.

60 Responses to Obama Calls Local Officials to Lobby for Gun Control After Kalamazoo

Unlikely in Michigan. We may be plagued by liberal idiots in Lansing and the SE corner of our state, but the rest of the state is pretty conservative. Even in Detroit the local police chief encourages people to get their concealed pistol license and to go armed.

Yeah, Snyder is a piece of crap, but fortunately he is weak willed and won’t be able to push an anti-gun agenda. Of course, the results of the road tax where 91% voted against and Snyder pushed nearly identical legislation through anyway does give me pause.

Michigan is not conservative. Michigan is as solidly blue as MA, IL, NY, NJ or any other blue state. Yeah, we have/had a lot of hunters/Fudds but they are reliably brainwashed union members who will vote Dem in every election.

Michigan is a strange animal. Both of Michigan’s U.S. Senators have been Democrat for decades. Michigan usually votes D for President of the United States. Governors go back and forth between R and D. Republicans have held a majority in their state legislature for most of that last 20 or so years. I don’t know how you could characterize that as either blue or red.

A majority of voters want to elect Donald Trump. You are dreaming if you think that Ted Cruz is anything but a controlled shill for the establishment.
We need a wall across our southern border. We need a leader who will put the American people first. We to need bring jobs back from overseas. We need to kill the PC nonsense that is destroying our country.
Ted Cruz talks a good game, but he has had plenty of time to do any of the things he promises. He has been all talk and no action. What makes you think he would change after being elected president?
You can use cute name calling to disrespect Donald Trump, but if you understood anything about economics and trade, you would realize that he is the man for the job.

“Plenty of time”? So three years in the Senate is all it should take for one man to solve all the problems with this country?

And if you understood anything about economics and trade, you would know that there isn’t jack-shit any president can do about jobs being moved overseas. Trump says he’s going to somehow force Apple to make iPhones in the U.S. How exactly would he do that? Ask nicely? Call them names until they do? Fundamentally rewrite the laws of economics so that it’s not impossibly expensive to make the iPhone here?

Stinkeye is 100% correct. I agree Trump does say a lot of things I agree with but isn’t that how we ended up with obama? He too had a nice campaign slogan and ran on saying things Americans wanted to hear with no history to back him up. Trump has a history but obviously you have never even bothered to look into it to see the real person Trump is. The only thing he cares about is himself and making money. Trump is what people claim to hate about politics, using government./political connections to get ahead.

You then go on to bash Cruz who has only been in the Senate for 3 years? What do you expect 1 senator to do? He has done a lot including standing up for our gun rights, stood up to obamacare, has even stood up to his own party leaders. Where do you get this lie that he is an establishment shill? The GOP cannot stand him because he has stood up to them in defense of all citizens. You can thank Cruz for the Heller SCOTUS case as well. Trump has never done anything for anyone else unless he got some benefit out of it. I can go on all day and prove Cruz is more deserving than that fraud Trump but it doesn’t matter because there are too many ignorant people in this country, they gave us obama and now they will give us Trump.

If the establishment were really that powerful, then Jeb would have driven everyone else from the race by now. Instead, Jeb’s out, and the three anti-establishment candidates Cruz, Trump and Carson have combined to win 79% of the delegates so far.

Everybody’s on the same stage at this point. It’s in the hands of the voters now and the people have no one to blame but themselves for what happens.

I read an article in a German newspaper the other day that interviewed survivors of the Paris attacks. I got through the whole article without seeing one reference to gun control, the NRA, or the various parroted gun control talking points about how those deaths were somehow my fault for owning a tool. It was interesting because at the end of the article, I was angry and sad for the correct reasons.

1) Use a tragedy as a crisis, or create a crisis where none exists.
2) Paint the crisis with as much emotion as possible, and throw logical analysis out the window.
3) Propose the one and only solution to the problem, which just happens to coincide with what you’ve wanted to implement for many years.
4) Paint anyone who opposes your one and only solution as evil, uncaring, not smart enough to understand the nuanced brilliance of your solution, or in the pockets of …. you pick the evil entity.
5) Force the solution on the people by any means, whether legislatively, by executive order, or through the legal system.
6) When the unintended consequences of your solution rear their ugly head, use them as a reason for more brilliant solutions to made up crises .

So laws requiring universal background checks, registration, and being required to have a permit to carry a concealed handgun didn’t stop that wacko so we need more gun laws? Like what, confinscation? Why don’t we just make murder illegal? Oh wait…

Yes sir … I do believe Michigan has handgun registration, requires all people to pass background checks before acquiring pistols from any source (whether via private, person-to-person sales or via federally licensed dealers), and requires a license to carry a handgun in public.

None of those measures stopped this piece of human garbage from murdering 6 people. What additional measure could possibly have stopped this piece of trash?

Hey, Doesn’t Uber have a “No guns” policy in an “UBER CAR” or is that only a restriction for the passengers, thereby putting passengers at risk by wack job drivers that pass background checks.
Another case of Gun free zones being ripe for shootings

Chicago, is an uncontrollable lost cause. It has been removed from the map of civilization.Thus no longer is included in any kind of statistics.
Barry will pick a more controlled environment to live upon (retiring?)

Good on President Obama to pledge to have the federal government do their job – support the local governments in investigating this mess.

– Calling upon the locals to do something else at the same time, seems a tad counterproductive. In terms of unwinding the mess. In terms of exploiting the dead folk to advance a political agenda, it might be just the thing.

– President Obama’s solution to everything is more “laws”, actually more unilateral, centralized control. Just like he was going to provide everyone in the US with medical care (his appointment schedule must be insane — Oh wait. He meant he was going to try to coerce other people with the actual skills to help to provide medical care, for which he was going to take credit. Carry on.)

He has yet to demonstrate how “more gun laws” will help with stuff like this. I’d appreciate if if he would draw the connection, step by step, for slow folks like me. When Paris gets shot up a couple times, as well as parts of the US, I have difficulty with how all those laws are helping. Maybe they didn’t work in Paris because the shooters don’t speak French?

– “Clearly we’re going to need to do more if we’re going to keep innocent Americans safe. I’ve got to assume that all of you are just as tired as I am of seeing this stuff happen in your states.”

Indeed. And I wish he’d do something useful about it as opposed to the nonsense he proposes. Or at least shut up and get out of the way.

— “partner and think about what we can do in a common-sense way, in a bipartisan way, without some of the ideological rhetoric that so often surrounds that issue.”

You first. Raise the issue, or any one issue, without slamming someone within the first five minutes. I’ll believe it when I see it.

– “Mr. Obama . . . told the governors that gun violence is just as much of a national-security concern as terrorist attacks like the one in California in December.”

Well, at least he’s calling the terrorist attack in California a terrorist attack. That’s progress. BTW, was there perhaps any indication beforehand those folks were inclined to do such a thing? On social media, perhaps?

– “The attack in San Bernardino killed 14 of our fellow Americans, and here’s a hard truth: we probably lost even more Americans than that to guns this weekend alone,” Mr. Obama said.

Indeed. What’s he gonna do about the hotbeds of violence & crime where people get killed all the time? Also, use of language. “With guns.” It’s “with guns.” Guns just sit there. People do the killing.

– Once again, the President is waving the bloody shirt for gun control before any salient facts about a shooting emerge. Not that salient facts have anything to do with his call for gun control. Or anyone else’s either.

Time for a “national conversation.” Here goes: “”Shut up,” they explained.”

Maybe Bury Soetoro will weep to get his way. I’m not holding my breath for Ted Cruz. He’s my guy but I’m old and been down this path before. I don’t trust the orange guy but we may be stuck with him. Anything is better than the old hag…

Yo, Barry; if guns are so bad: You are commander in chief of a whole lot of guys who you can easily order disarmed, you know…. Why not start with them, and see how wonderful disarming people work out, and how much “safer” it makes them? Leaving the rest of us as a control, until your little experiment either proves or disproves your thesis.

6 people died and he called 3 local officials. Given that they probably weren’t immediately available it’s probably safe to assume at least 20 minutes per phone call. So 6 people killed and 60 minutes on the phone.